#: 1103 S0/CompuServe Mail [MAIL] 18-Oct-94 18:04 CDT Sb: Prodigy Questions to Wecht Fm: Bob Artwohl [71712,2151] Wecht is making a guest appearance on Prodigy in the "Cops and Crimes BB." Members are allowed to ask questions. These are the questions I have put to him: PRODIGY(R) interactive personal service 10/18 6:45 PM Number of notes exported: 1 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Board: CRIME BB ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Topic: FORENSIC SHERLOCK ^^^^^^^^^^^^ =============== Note 1 ================= Board: CRIME BB Topic: FORENSIC SHERLOCK Subject: JFK-WILSON ANALYSIS To: BLUE99B CYRIL WECHT Date: 10/18 From: BSMK63A ROBERT ARTWOHL Time: 4:36 PM Dear Dr. Wecht, In your recent book, Cause of Death, you state the following: "As the computer scans the remainder of the photograph, Tom has it focus on the neck area. When he eliminates levels of gray thereby removing shadows, he spots a hole in the neck area of Kennedy's coat. 'This is where the missile went in,' [Tom Wilson] says. 'Look, it clearly shows the coats fibers going inward, meaning he was shot from the front. This was some of the most amazing news I had ever heard, or certainly had ever seen. If his technique can be duplicated by scientists at MIT or a similar educational facility and is not subject to inadvertant manipulation and variation, this technology could end the government's claim of a single gunman. The technique will tell us where the bullet were and whether they were entrance or exit wounds. . ." I do not understand why you did not dismiss this claim out of hand. Here are some problems you seem to have overlooked: 1. The resolution of Z frame 313 makes it impossible to distinguish individual fibers of the coat. No technique, no matter how sophisticated, can enhance resolution of a photograph to show things that are simply not physically present within the grains of the film. 2. As you know, since you have inspected the original JFK's coat at the National archives, there are no bullet holes in the area of JFK's coat in which Wilson claims to see one. Thus it appears that Wilson cannot possibly be correct, no? Your comments please. Robert R. Artwohl, M.D. PRODIGY(R) interactive personal service 10/18 6:43 PM Number of notes exported: 1 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Board: CRIME BB ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Topic: FORENSIC SHERLOCK ^^^^^^^^^^^^ =============== Note 1 ================= Board: CRIME BB Topic: FORENSIC SHERLOCK Subject: JKF/COLLAR To: BLUE99B CYRIL WECHT Date: 10/18 From: BSMK63A ROBERT ARTWOHL Time: 6:27 PM Dear Dr. Wecht, In your recent book, Cause of Death, you wrote the following, "Holding the jacket up, I examined the bullet hole through the back. It was exactly 5 and three quarters inches down from the collar. Thats exactly where the autopsy doctors where the autopsy doctors stated the wound was. In fact, they went so far as to draw the bullet wound about five inches below the base of the neck." As you must know, a collar does not rest at the base of the neck. In a sitting positon, the collar rests near the base of the skull. In virtually every photograph taken of JFK in the motorcade, in which the details of JFKs coat can be discerned, JFKs coat is hunched up in the back. For instance, one photograph taken by Robert Croft when JFK was on Elm street, corresponding to Z frame 160, which about one second before JFK was hit, his jacket is clearly hunched. In addition, JFKs coat and shirt collar sit at the base of his skull, not at the base of his neck. Furthermore, the autopsy photographs clearly show that the bullet wound is 5.5 cm (about 2 inches) below the inferior nuchal crease (the lowest wrinkle in the back of JFKs neck). The inferior nuchal crease overlies the cervical spine at about the level of C4 or C5. Thus two inches below that would fall at the level at around the level of C7, or at the base of the neck. Since the collar sat at the base of the skull, and given the fact that the coat jacket was hunched up, a bullet hole 5 and three quarters inches below the top of the collar would line quite well with a bullet hole at the base of the neck. Furthermore, the autopsy report states that the bullet hole was situated just above the upper border of the scapula [shoulder blade.] If the bullet hole was 5 and three quarters below the base of the neck, it could not have possibly have been situated above the upper border of the scapula, it would have either hit the scapula or it would have penetrated the back between the two scapulae. Your comments please. Sincerely, Robert R. Artwohl M.D. PRODIGY(R) interactive personal service 10/18 6:43 PM Number of notes exported: 1 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Board: CRIME BB ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Topic: FORENSIC SHERLOCK ^^^^^^^^^^^^ =============== Note 1 ================= Board: CRIME BB Topic: FORENSIC SHERLOCK Subject: JFK/CONNALLY To: BLUE99B CYRIL WECHT Date: 10/18 From: BSMK63A ROBERT ARTWOHL Time: 4:59 PM Dear Dr. Wecht, In your recent book, Cause of Death, you quote Connally as saying: "'We heard a shot,' Governor Connally told reporters inDecember 1963 in first public statement about what had happened. 'I turned and looked into the back seat and the President was slumped. He had been hit.'" You go on to write, "Until his death in 1993, Governor Connally said, he too was hit. On many occassions he rejected the 'single bullet theory.' Amazingly, he said he believes the basic conclusion of the Warren Commission--that Oswald was the lone gunman." As you must know after over 20 years of reviewing the Zapurder film, Connally could know when JFK was hit. When Connally was hit (either at Z223-224, or even later) he was facing forward. In fact, Connally was facing forward as he is lost from view going behind the Stemmons freeway sign. At that time, JFK is still waving and smiling and has not yet been hit, Connally turns back around only long after both he was shot and Kennedy had already been shot for the first time. Furthermore, Connally states that he heard a shot, then turn around to look behind him, then turn back around toward the front. This occurs just after Zapruder frame Z 160. At this time Kennedy has not yet been hit. Thus Kennedy could not have been hit by the first shot as Connally believe, no? Thus, would you not agree that any statement that Connally makes about when JFK was shot is unreliable? Your comments, please, Robert R. Artwohl, M.D, PRODIGY(R) interactive personal service 10/18 6:52 PM Number of notes exported: 1 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Board: CRIME BB ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Topic: FORENSIC SHERLOCK ^^^^^^^^^^^^ =============== Note 1 ================= Board: CRIME BB Topic: FORENSIC SHERLOCK Subject: CONNALLY THIGH WND. To: BLUE99B CYRIL WECHT Date: 10/18 From: BSMK63A ROBERT ARTWOHL Time: 6:43 PM Dear Dr. Wecht, In your recent book, Cause of Death, you wrote the following: "While the Governor lay on the stretcher, [Warren Commission] officials said, the bullet must have plopped out. Now the stretcher bullet was from Connallys left thigh." "What absolute nonsense. The only time bullets plop out is when you have a big gaping hole. Governor Connallys leg wound was anthing but large. It was also not a simple surface wound. The bullet went deep into the leg. When a bullet penetrates the skin and goes deeply into the leg, as happened with Governor Connally, it becomes immediately entrapped in the tissue because of the hemorrhaging and swelling." [end quote] However, does the evidence support that the bullet went deep in the leg? When Connally was brought into the emergency room, one of the surgeons saw what he thought was a tiny bullet fragment embedded in the femur. However, there was no bullet in the leg. Although the wound was not large, it was 1 cm in diameter. The bullet fragment that was seen in the leg was only 1 or 2 millimeters. How can a 1 or 2 millimeter fragment cause a 1 cm wound? Furthermore, the surgeon treating Connallys wound misread the film. The fragment was not embedded in the femur, but was located only a few mm beneath the skin. The x-ray was read properly by the Parkland hospital radiologist, Dr. Reynolds: "this small density lies 8 millemeters beneath the skin." Thus given the fact the the skin wound was 1 cm in diameter and that the missile fragment was only 1 or 2 mm and that it was only lodge 8 mm beneath the skin, is it not possible that a bullet traveling at low velocity could have hit the leg with just enough energy to barely penetrate only part of is length beneath the skin and deposit only a small metal fragment. As you know CE 399 is just about 30 mm long. Had it only penetrated 8 mm, then 22 mm of its length wound have remained outside the leg. Your comments please. Robert R. Artwohl, M.D. PRODIGY(R) interactive personal service 10/18 6:44 PM Number of notes exported: 1 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Board: CRIME BB ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Topic: FORENSIC SHERLOCK ^^^^^^^^^^^^ =============== Note 1 ================= Board: CRIME BB Topic: FORENSIC SHERLOCK Subject: JFK-RADIAL NERVE To: BLUE99B CYRIL WECHT Date: 10/18 From: BSMK63A ROBERT ARTWOHL Time: 4:31 PM Dear Dr. Wecht, In your book, Cause of Death, regarding the Governor Connally's wounds, you state the following: "Furthermore, in frame 230 of the Zapruder film, Governor Conally's right wrist and hand are clearly visible. Each finger is easily identifiable as he holds his large white Stetson hat. However, the Warren Commission's reconstruction of the events states that more than a second before this frame, the magic bullet had already shattered his wrist and severed the radial nerve. This is one of the nerves that enables the thumb and index finger to grasp ohJects. Yet in the film he sits there with absolutely no evidence of pain on his face and his hand firmly gripping his hat, clearly visible to the spectators who lined the streets." As a forensic pathologist who has studied the case for over 30 years, clearly you must know that the only nerve damaged was the superficial branch of the radial nerve which only supplies sensation to part of the back of the hand and is not involved in the ability of the thumb and finder to grasp objects. Furthermore it is the ulnar and median nerve that enervate the muscles required for grip. Connally suffered no nerve damage that would prevent him holding on to his hat, no? Your comments please. Sincerely, Robert R. Artwohl, M.D. PRODIGY(R) interactive personal service 10/18 11:18 PM Number of notes exported: 1 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Board: CRIME BB ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Topic: FORENSIC SHERLOCK ^^^^^^^^^^^^ =============== Note 1 ================= Board: CRIME BB Topic: FORENSIC SHERLOCK Subject: WITNESS DEATHS To: BLUE99B CYRIL WECHT Date: 10/18 From: BSMK63A ROBERT ARTWOHL Time: 11:17 PM Dear Dr. Wecht, In your latest book, Cause of Death, you make the following statement: "Amazingly, eighteen of the witnesses who were standing in Dealey Plaza had died mysterious deaths by 1966. The London Times estimated that the odds of that happening were 100,000 trillion to one." Have you submitted this to an independent statistical analysis? Jim Marrs in CROSSFIRE, lists 36 so-called suspicious deaths up through 1966. Out of those 36 deaths, only two, Lee Bowers, Jr. and James Worrel, Jr. were Dealey plaza witnesses, I believe. Acutally, the statistic of the London Times was not about 18 Dealey Plaza witnesses, it was about 15 persons found in the Warren Commission index. Also, are you aware that the London Times later retracted this statistic and stated they had made an error in their analysis? Andrew Whitaker, Legal Manger of the London Sunday Times wrote: "Our piece about the odds against the deaths of the Kennedy witnesses was, I regret to say, based on a careless journalistic mistake and should not have published. This was realized by the Sunday Times editorial staff after the firstr edition. . .There is no question of our actuary having got his answer wrong. . ."(HSCA Vol IV, 464-465) Your comments, please. Robert R. Artwohl, M.D. PRODIGY(R) interactive personal service 10/18 11:15 PM Number of notes exported: 1 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Board: CRIME BB ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Topic: FORENSIC SHERLOCK ^^^^^^^^^^^^ =============== Note 1 ================= Board: CRIME BB Topic: FORENSIC SHERLOCK Subject: REMOVAL FROM DALLAS To: BLUE99B CYRIL WECHT Date: 10/18 From: BSMK63A ROBERT ARTWOHL Time: 10:04 PM Dear Dr. Wecht, In your latest book, Cause of Death, you write: "To begin with, the autopsy should have been done right there in Dallas by the citys medical examiner, Dr. Earl Rose. Murder was then and still is a state crime, not a federal crime. Local and state authorities had absolute jurisdiction, not the federal authorities, even when the President of the United States was the victim." However, in your July 1966 article in the Journal of Forensic Sciences, A Critique of the Medical Aspects of the Investigation in to the Assassination of President Kennedy you stated the following: "I have heard several forensic pathologists comment that if the assassination had occurred in their jurisdictions, the body would never have been taken from their cities until an autopsy had been performed. Although I agree with this philosophy generally, I cannot accept it in this particular case. As has been stated above, at the time of the shooting, nobody could state with certainty what the nature and extent of the assassination attempt was. For all that anybody knew, there could have a revolutionary plot involving many people. It was essential for the presidential party to return to Washington and get the now President Johnson out of Dallas immediately. . .I find it quite easy to draw the line with the body of the President of the United States. I see no reason why, if a President is assassinated the body should remain at the place of assassination for examination by the local coroner or medical examiner." How do you reconcile these two very firm and unambiguous yet contradictory opinions? Incidentally, you made another error in the above passage from Cause of Death. The murder of the President of the United States is now a federal crime and federal authorities have jurisdiction wherever in America a President is killed. The law was passed shortly after the Kennedy murder, nearly 30 years ago. Your comments please. Robert Artwohl. M.D. DR WECHT'S RESPONSE: PRODIGY(R) interactive personal service Board: CRIME BB Topic: FORENSIC SHERLOCK Subject: CYRIL WECHT RESPONDS To: ALL Date: 10/25 From: BLUE99B CYRIL WECHT Time: 7:06 PM I want to thank all of you who posted forthright and sincere questions for me on this bulletin board over the past two weeks. I regret that my schedule--and that of my son Ben, who posted my responses for me--did not permit me to answer all of them. Our inexperience with Prodigy--or with interactive computer services of any kind, for that matter--further subtracted from the time we had made available for this project. The lack of a response to those questions that were posed in a friendly and honest manner, therefore, should not be construed as a rejection of them. However, in keeping with a philosophy that I adopted long ago, I chose not to respond to those inquiries that I felt were posed for devious purposes or in a hostile fashion. Of course, there will always be a few who will choose to attribute sinister motives to my failure to answer them. I have no response to those individuals other than what I've stated above. To the rest of you, I offer my sincere gratitude for your having taken the time and effort to contact me. If I did not get to your question, or was unable to answer it fully, please feel free to contact me personally by traditional mail. As time permits, I will make every effort to respond to your inquiry, just as I have been doing for almost 30 years regarding the JFK case and just as I have done regarding countless other cases in more recent years. Sincerely, Cyril H. Wecht, M.D., J.D. Department of Pathology St. Francis Central Hospital 1200 Centre Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15219